[ExI] Conspiracy epistemology (Was: cut off worried)

Rafal Smigrodzki rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Fri Feb 19 00:38:54 UTC 2016

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> So, can anybody scrounge up enough Bayes factors to get the prior up to
> 0.1?
>  ### The Pillow!

Actually, the pillow is weak evidence in favor of natural death. We may
presume that a conspiracy to assassinate a Supreme Court judge in an
election year would include some pretty ruthless persons, most likely
high-enough in the corridors of power to be above average organizers and
manipulators. Such persons would not leave a pillow actually *lying on the
face of the victim*, as if they wanted to suggest an assassination
occurred. Since a dying person may aimlessly grab objects within reach, the
no-ninja hypothesis is thereby strengthened.

On the other hand, what if the conspiracy *wanted* to make it look like an
assassination? Or maybe the opposite - What if a disgruntled hotel maid
wanted to take the political future of the country in her own hands but
looked into the dead eyes of the victim and just had to cover them up?

Mind boggles. Shadows behind every pillow.

1e-8 sounds like a good guess, give or take a few.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160218/f357999e/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list